Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Site Notices
1/22/2020 12:12:56 PM
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 4
Posted: 1/16/2015 9:26:46 PM EST
[Last Edit: 1/16/2015 9:27:32 PM EST by veritas_rasa]
The B-52 has only been able to carry smart weapons on its external pylons, with its internal weapons bay being relegated to nuclear and dumb bombs, as well as some older cruise missiles. Now, the iconic 60 year old Stratofortress is finally getting a new 'smart' rotary weapons rack and other upgrades that will more than double its smart weapons punch.

You could say that the B-52's empty weapons bay has been the most under-utilized real estate in the entire USAF. Even as the B-52's utility morphed over the decades (from a nuclear interdiction option, to a carpet bomber, to a nuclear cruise missile carrier, to a conventional cruise missile carrier, to a smart bomb lobber, to a precision close air support platform) the big bomber's cavernous belly has become more and more of an empty afterthought.

Although having the B-52 lug its smart bombs on its large inboard weapons pylons has not kept it out of the fight, this configuration has hurt the gas guzzling behemoth's fuel economy and range and has left great potential on the table, especially in an age of anti-access warfare and advanced standoff weaponry.

Link to more

Link Posted: 1/16/2015 9:29:19 PM EST
Just how long are those airframes going to last?
Link Posted: 1/16/2015 9:30:51 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By AlvinYork:
Just how long are those airframes going to last?
View Quote
Only the dead have seen the end of war...and the BUFF.
Link Posted: 1/16/2015 9:32:31 PM EST
Link Posted: 1/16/2015 9:33:15 PM EST
I still think we should retire the damn things.
Link Posted: 1/16/2015 9:34:05 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By AlvinYork:
Just how long are those airframes going to last?
View Quote
I recall reading something in one article about replacing the old engines with new turbofans that said based on non-wartime flight hours and training,

they could last to about 2050 in usable terms.
Link Posted: 1/16/2015 9:35:17 PM EST
[Last Edit: 1/16/2015 9:35:58 PM EST by MAJClem]
Just a bunch more weapons that will only be released if:

1. It is in support of SF
2. There is a super qualified JTAC on the radio
3. There is an opportunity to tie up airspace and prevent the use of GMLRs or Excalibur
4. There is absolutely no SAM or air threat
Link Posted: 1/16/2015 9:35:35 PM EST
I thought the fucking ACRE of real estate (if you have ever stood inside that HUGE ass bomb bay, you KNOW what I mean) could all handle smart bombs.


Link Posted: 1/16/2015 9:36:39 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Combat_Jack:
I still think we should retire the damn things.
View Quote
To spend money on what other platform?


Link Posted: 1/16/2015 9:37:06 PM EST
Love shack?
Link Posted: 1/16/2015 9:37:09 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Formergrunt94:
I recall reading something in one article about replacing the old engines with new turbofans that said based on non-wartime flight hours and training,

they could last to about 2050 in usable terms.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Formergrunt94:
Originally Posted By AlvinYork:
Just how long are those airframes going to last?
I recall reading something in one article about replacing the old engines with new turbofans that said based on non-wartime flight hours and training,

they could last to about 2050 in usable terms.

damn, a hundred years?
Link Posted: 1/16/2015 9:38:17 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By AlvinYork:
Just how long are those airframes going to last?
View Quote


There are some projections putting them at 100 year service lives.

They're nearly 60% of the way there already...
Link Posted: 1/16/2015 9:38:45 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Hater:
To spend money on what other platform?


View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Hater:
Originally Posted By Combat_Jack:
I still think we should retire the damn things.
To spend money on what other platform?




F35!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Link Posted: 1/16/2015 9:39:07 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Hater:
To spend money on what other platform?


View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Hater:
Originally Posted By Combat_Jack:
I still think we should retire the damn things.
To spend money on what other platform?




Nothing can touch their endurance or bomb load.

Keep upgrading and flying the BUFF until orbital bombing becomes cheap.

Link Posted: 1/16/2015 9:39:32 PM EST
It works.

Make more of them.
Link Posted: 1/16/2015 9:40:04 PM EST
in before megafortress
Link Posted: 1/16/2015 9:41:47 PM EST
[Last Edit: 1/16/2015 9:42:16 PM EST by Chairborne]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Cpt_Kirks:


Nothing can touch their endurance or bomb load.

Keep upgrading and flying the BUFF until orbital bombing becomes cheap.

View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Cpt_Kirks:
Originally Posted By Hater:
Originally Posted By Combat_Jack:
I still think we should retire the damn things.
To spend money on what other platform?




Nothing can touch their endurance or bomb load.

Keep upgrading and flying the BUFF until orbital bombing becomes cheap.



Except the B-1, and B-2. Endurance is an idiotic thing to brag about in the age of aerial refueling.
Link Posted: 1/16/2015 9:42:29 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By MAJClem:
Just a bunch more weapons that will only be released if:

1. It is in support of SF
2. There is a super qualified JTAC on the radio
3. There is an opportunity to tie up airspace and prevent the use of GMLRs or Excalibur
4. There is absolutely no SAM or air threat
View Quote

Joint as fuck.
Link Posted: 1/16/2015 9:43:28 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By AlvinYork:

damn, a hundred years?
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By AlvinYork:
Originally Posted By Formergrunt94:
Originally Posted By AlvinYork:
Just how long are those airframes going to last?
I recall reading something in one article about replacing the old engines with new turbofans that said based on non-wartime flight hours and training,

they could last to about 2050 in usable terms.

damn, a hundred years?
If I recall correctly, about that. But, I do seem to remember that figure being based on peacetime flight hours.
Link Posted: 1/16/2015 9:46:31 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Formergrunt94:
If I recall correctly, about that. But, I do seem to remember that figure being based on peacetime flight hours.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Formergrunt94:
Originally Posted By AlvinYork:
Originally Posted By Formergrunt94:
Originally Posted By AlvinYork:
Just how long are those airframes going to last?
I recall reading something in one article about replacing the old engines with new turbofans that said based on non-wartime flight hours and training,

they could last to about 2050 in usable terms.

damn, a hundred years?
If I recall correctly, about that. But, I do seem to remember that figure being based on peacetime flight hours.

peace or war, it represents a lot of time at altitude, a lot of decompressions and recompressions.
Link Posted: 1/16/2015 9:47:09 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Hater:
To spend money on what other platform?


View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Hater:
Originally Posted By Combat_Jack:
I still think we should retire the damn things.
To spend money on what other platform?






How about modern artillery since you can't drive it away with an AK pointed skyward and some tracers. Plus, you don't need a JTAC and permission from someone a thousand miles away to use it...and you can adjust without having the guy on the other end of the radio run out of gas and go home.

Link Posted: 1/16/2015 9:47:56 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By FedDC:




How about modern artillery since you can't drive it away with an AK pointed skyward and some tracers. Plus, you don't need a JTAC and permission from someone a thousand miles away to use it...and you can adjust without having the guy on the other end of the radio run out of gas and go home.

View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By FedDC:
Originally Posted By Hater:
Originally Posted By Combat_Jack:
I still think we should retire the damn things.
To spend money on what other platform?






How about modern artillery since you can't drive it away with an AK pointed skyward and some tracers. Plus, you don't need a JTAC and permission from someone a thousand miles away to use it...and you can adjust without having the guy on the other end of the radio run out of gas and go home.



Not important, that's why we canceled crusader.
Link Posted: 1/16/2015 9:48:12 PM EST
[Last Edit: 1/16/2015 9:49:42 PM EST by burkeva]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By AlvinYork:
Just how long are those airframes going to last?
View Quote


Non fighter airframes have a much longer life span than the smaller agile stuff. I went on a C5 last year that was built in. 1969. Worked fine.
Link Posted: 1/16/2015 9:49:39 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By burkeva:


Non fighter airframes have a much longer life down than the smaller agile stuff. I goes on a C5 last year that was built in. 1969. Worked fine.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By burkeva:
Originally Posted By AlvinYork:
Just how long are those airframes going to last?


Non fighter airframes have a much longer life down than the smaller agile stuff. I goes on a C5 last year that was built in. 1969. Worked fine.

still I am amazed that DC3s and Buffs are still flying today.
Link Posted: 1/16/2015 9:49:48 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By AlvinYork:

damn, a hundred years?
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By AlvinYork:
Originally Posted By Formergrunt94:
Originally Posted By AlvinYork:
Just how long are those airframes going to last?
I recall reading something in one article about replacing the old engines with new turbofans that said based on non-wartime flight hours and training,

they could last to about 2050 in usable terms.

damn, a hundred years?

It won't be the only airframe to make it that long.

We had the AMC commander stop by our base and he gave a talk after drill. This was right after the Wright Brother's 100th anniversary and he commented that our jets when they retire would be like walking out to the flight line that day and seeing a row of Wright Fliers sitting on the apron.
Link Posted: 1/16/2015 9:50:18 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Cpt_Kirks:
I thought the fucking ACRE of real estate (if you have ever stood inside that HUGE ass bomb bay, you KNOW what I mean) could all handle smart bombs.


View Quote


It's only 28x6 feet, hardly an acre.
Link Posted: 1/16/2015 9:50:38 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Chairborne:
Not important, that's why we canceled crusader.
View Quote


Must....not....make....thinking........strategically.........comment.
Link Posted: 1/16/2015 9:52:38 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Combat_Jack:
I still think we should retire the damn things.
View Quote


I'm sure the F-35 is up to the task.
Link Posted: 1/16/2015 9:55:32 PM EST
Got the T shirt





Link Posted: 1/16/2015 9:56:26 PM EST
Would that airframe benefit much from anti-vortice winglets?
Link Posted: 1/16/2015 9:57:45 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Loremsk:
Would that airframe benefit much from anti-vortice winglets?
View Quote

What it would most benefit from is new engines. Every time we determined it wouldn't be worth it we roll right past the return on investment point and keep going.
Link Posted: 1/16/2015 9:59:27 PM EST
[Last Edit: 1/16/2015 10:00:35 PM EST by makeitflyfast]
Link Posted: 1/16/2015 10:01:32 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Hater:
To spend money on what other platform?


View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Hater:
Originally Posted By Combat_Jack:
I still think we should retire the damn things.
To spend money on what other platform?




Paladin PIM and HIMARS for the close fight, and a line of GLCMs for the mid range fight. The B2 and B52 can make up the difference.

Originally Posted By SmilingBandit:
Originally Posted By Loremsk:
Would that airframe benefit much from anti-vortice winglets?

What it would most benefit from is new engines. Every time we determined it wouldn't be worth it we roll right past the return on investment point and keep going.


This. The last time they did the study they used maintenance costs that were extremely optimistic. They've gone up about 1,000% since then.
Link Posted: 1/16/2015 10:01:54 PM EST
They better get started on procurement of its replacement, they only have 35 years. If they shoot for 2020 they might have a working model in time.
Link Posted: 1/16/2015 10:04:21 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Rogue-Sasquatch:


There are some projections putting them at 100 year service lives.

They're nearly 60% of the way there already...
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Rogue-Sasquatch:
Originally Posted By AlvinYork:
Just how long are those airframes going to last?


There are some projections putting them at 100 year service lives.

They're nearly 60% of the way there already...
A 100 year service life.
That is amazing to consider.
Has any military weapon ever seen frontline service for 100 years ?
Link Posted: 1/16/2015 10:04:46 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By AlvinYork:

still I am amazed that DC3s and Buffs are still flying today.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By AlvinYork:
Originally Posted By burkeva:
Originally Posted By AlvinYork:
Just how long are those airframes going to last?


Non fighter airframes have a much longer life down than the smaller agile stuff. I goes on a C5 last year that was built in. 1969. Worked fine.

still I am amazed that DC3s and Buffs are still flying today.


DC-3s don't - in general - undergo the kind of stresses that a B-52 does, since the DC-3 isn't pressurized.
Link Posted: 1/16/2015 10:10:51 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Fullpower:
A 100 year service life. That is amazing to consider.
Has any military weapon ever seen frontline service for 100 years ?
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Fullpower:
Originally Posted By Rogue-Sasquatch:
Originally Posted By AlvinYork:
Just how long are those airframes going to last?


There are some projections putting them at 100 year service lives.

They're nearly 60% of the way there already...
A 100 year service life. That is amazing to consider.
Has any military weapon ever seen frontline service for 100 years ?


The M2 will be there in a few years. The M1911 already hit that mark.
Link Posted: 1/16/2015 10:11:11 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Rogue-Sasquatch:


DC-3s don't - in general - undergo the kind of stresses that a B-52 does, since the DC-3 isn't pressurized.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Rogue-Sasquatch:
Originally Posted By AlvinYork:
Originally Posted By burkeva:
Originally Posted By AlvinYork:
Just how long are those airframes going to last?


Non fighter airframes have a much longer life down than the smaller agile stuff. I goes on a C5 last year that was built in. 1969. Worked fine.

still I am amazed that DC3s and Buffs are still flying today.


DC-3s don't - in general - undergo the kind of stresses that a B-52 does, since the DC-3 isn't pressurized.

that has got to be a lot of stress never the less, what with the landings and take offs.
Link Posted: 1/16/2015 10:11:42 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Fullpower:
A 100 year service life. That is amazing to consider.
Has any military weapon ever seen frontline service for 100 years ?
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Fullpower:
Originally Posted By Rogue-Sasquatch:
Originally Posted By AlvinYork:
Just how long are those airframes going to last?


There are some projections putting them at 100 year service lives.

They're nearly 60% of the way there already...
A 100 year service life. That is amazing to consider.
Has any military weapon ever seen frontline service for 100 years ?


The spear. The bow. The horse......
Link Posted: 1/16/2015 10:13:30 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Combat_Jack:


Paladin PIM and HIMARS for the close fight, and a line of GLCMs for the mid range fight. The B2 and B52 can make up the difference.



This. The last time they did the study they used maintenance costs that were extremely optimistic. They've gone up about 1,000% since then.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Combat_Jack:
Originally Posted By Hater:
Originally Posted By Combat_Jack:
I still think we should retire the damn things.
To spend money on what other platform?




Paladin PIM and HIMARS for the close fight, and a line of GLCMs for the mid range fight. The B2 and B52 can make up the difference.

Originally Posted By SmilingBandit:
Originally Posted By Loremsk:
Would that airframe benefit much from anti-vortice winglets?

What it would most benefit from is new engines. Every time we determined it wouldn't be worth it we roll right past the return on investment point and keep going.


This. The last time they did the study they used maintenance costs that were extremely optimistic. They've gone up about 1,000% since then.


Paladin PIM is meaningless with a 39 caliber tube.
Link Posted: 1/16/2015 10:14:50 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By MAJClem:
Paladin PIM is meaningless with a 39 caliber tube.
View Quote


I would have bought the PzH2000, but I was not consulted.
Link Posted: 1/16/2015 10:15:12 PM EST
[Last Edit: 1/16/2015 10:17:23 PM EST by mcornell]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Fullpower:
A 100 year service life.
That is amazing to consider.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Fullpower:
Originally Posted By Rogue-Sasquatch:
Originally Posted By AlvinYork:
Just how long are those airframes going to last?


There are some projections putting them at 100 year service lives.

They're nearly 60% of the way there already...
A 100 year service life.
That is amazing to consider.
Has any military weapon ever seen frontline service for 100 years ?

M-2 50 Cal. Machinegun.

ETA: Way slow and off by a couple of years....
Link Posted: 1/16/2015 10:15:51 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Loremsk:


The spear. The bow. The horse......
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Loremsk:
Originally Posted By Fullpower:
Originally Posted By Rogue-Sasquatch:
Originally Posted By AlvinYork:
Just how long are those airframes going to last?


There are some projections putting them at 100 year service lives.

They're nearly 60% of the way there already...
A 100 year service life. That is amazing to consider.
Has any military weapon ever seen frontline service for 100 years ?


The spear. The bow. The horse......

The Long Land Pattern musket and its derivatives, all .75 caliber flintlock muskets, were the standard long guns of the British Empire's land forces from 1722 until 1838 when they were superseded by a percussion cap smoothbore musket. The British Ordnance System converted many flintlocks into the new percussion system known as the Pattern 1839 Musket. A fire in 1841 at the Tower of London destroyed many muskets before they could be converted. Still, the Brown Bess saw service until the middle of the nineteenth century. Per Wiki
Link Posted: 1/16/2015 10:17:27 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By AlvinYork:
Just how long are those airframes going to last?
View Quote



I wonder if the skin is the only original parts?
Link Posted: 1/16/2015 10:17:35 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Combat_Jack:


I would have bought the PzH2000, but I was not consulted.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Combat_Jack:
Originally Posted By MAJClem:
Paladin PIM is meaningless with a 39 caliber tube.


I would have bought the PzH2000, but I was not consulted.



About half the cost of Paladin PIM.

Ugh, I weep for my adopted branch
Link Posted: 1/16/2015 10:19:32 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By rabidus:



I wonder if the skin is the only original parts?
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By rabidus:
Originally Posted By AlvinYork:
Just how long are those airframes going to last?



I wonder if the skin is the only original parts?

Alot of the skin has been replaced.
Link Posted: 1/16/2015 10:20:06 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By AlvinYork:

that has got to be a lot of stress never the less, what with the landings and take offs.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By AlvinYork:
Originally Posted By Rogue-Sasquatch:


DC-3s don't - in general - undergo the kind of stresses that a B-52 does, since the DC-3 isn't pressurized.

that has got to be a lot of stress never the less, what with the landings and take offs.


Pressurization and depressurization cycles are a much bigger stress. Even in the past few years they haven't been having nearly as manny as an airliner gets.
Link Posted: 1/16/2015 10:20:36 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Combat_Jack:


I would have bought the PzH2000, but I was not consulted.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Combat_Jack:
Originally Posted By MAJClem:
Paladin PIM is meaningless with a 39 caliber tube.


I would have bought the PzH2000, but I was not consulted.


I watched a show on discovery or some other channel about those, the multiple round simultaneous impact fires from a single gun was kick ass.
Link Posted: 1/16/2015 10:22:06 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By MAJClem:



About half the cost of Paladin PIM.

Ugh, I weep for my adopted branch
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By MAJClem:
Originally Posted By Combat_Jack:
Originally Posted By MAJClem:
Paladin PIM is meaningless with a 39 caliber tube.


I would have bought the PzH2000, but I was not consulted.



About half the cost of Paladin PIM.

Ugh, I weep for my adopted branch


I weep no more.

I've transferred into a different branch as a part timer.

That said, the wisdom of replacing the turret, then replacing the hull underneath it is lost on my when the maneuver guys are doing everything they can to get away from the Bradley.
Link Posted: 1/16/2015 10:22:24 PM EST
I just spent an entire day trying to find a drag chute sling for it. We have 1, made in 1979.

I've canned all the CSD/Gen's from an aircraft to keep the another one MC.

Some shops such as E/E are down to 2 person a shift.

I don't want more or new planes. I just want parts/equipment/personnel and facilities to maintain them.

Link Posted: 1/16/2015 10:22:43 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Chairborne:


I watched a show on discovery or some other channel about those, the multiple round simultaneous impact fires from a single gun was kick ass.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Chairborne:
Originally Posted By Combat_Jack:
Originally Posted By MAJClem:
Paladin PIM is meaningless with a 39 caliber tube.


I would have bought the PzH2000, but I was not consulted.


I watched a show on discovery or some other channel about those, the multiple round simultaneous impact fires from a single gun was kick ass.


MRSI is kind of cool but range would have to be somewhat limited. The real advantage is in the range that the long gun gives.
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 4
Top Top